Login | Register


Plum Blossom (Design Map by BamboozleV)
Categories: A-Rank, Under Review
Weather: 





















[Games on this map]
[Play on this map]
[Map Analysis]
[Check Favorites]
[Export map as text]

Ratings go from 1 (awful) to 10 (near perfect).
Discuss this and other design maps and get tips and
suggestions from other users at the AWBW Design Maps Forum

Rating: 0 in 0 ratings
Map Committee Rating: 0 in 0 ratings
Comments:
walkerboh01 (05/08/2015 03:04am):
I don't think the FTA counter works. What's wrong with just removing the central preowned infs?
Xmo5 (05/08/2015 06:41am):
Yeah, the central infantry introduces a 3rd independent starting front and your counter is
obviously designed for 2. You could try to make it work if you really wanted to keep that
functionality but the counter will never be perfect.
Everdan (05/08/2015 12:38pm):
I think it actually does work theoretically. Even if you removed the central infs, you would still use the non
counter base to capture the neutral base. So the extra starting inf just accelerates that front by a bit, but both
sides get the same boost. Arguably it might have to be adjusted if this acceleration causes imbalance in the
fund curves, but I don't think there are major problems with it as it is.
the-deadly-shadow (05/09/2015 10:55am):
Theoretically I agree with walkerboh01. Normally you would give one infantery. However in
this case you should notice that the extra infantery also produces FTA.

And doesn't yellow move first?
Everdan (05/09/2015 11:32am):
That is... an excellent point. Right then.
Bamboozle (05/09/2015 12:19pm):
Yeah I was attempting to try something, I can see the points for how it doesn't
work now though.
And I also seem to have a deadly case of switchingupcountryturnorder
syndrome. Please pray for me.
walkerboh01 (05/09/2015 05:24pm):
The reason I didn't like the preowned infs in the center is because it can exacerbate what would
otherwise be negligible FTA. This is essentially what Everdan is calling "imbalance in the fund
curves". I didn't do the calculation for this map, so it might be okay, but in general it's nicer to
have the neutral base take a little longer to capture.

Longer explanation: One way to think about it is that when the neutral base is captured right
away, the situation is almost equivalent to a map that has 3 preowned bases. In that case, I
hope it's clear why it's problematic for one side to go first from both bases. Even though in the
current situation you have one player capturing two bases first (i.e., getting the first move from
two bases), the imbalance is usually small because there are more units on the field by the time
the imbalance kicks in.

Having a +1 inf advantage on the first 2-3 turns can often cause vehicle advantages, because
the properties you capture on the first couple turns are more valuable in terms of total funding
given. Delaying that advantage until later (by making the neutral base capture-able after 3 days
instead of 1, for example) usually delays that funding edge to the part of the capture phase
where the extra +1-2k doesn't have any impact on when players are able to build vehicles. Thus
it doesn't really have a noticeable impact on balance.
BamboozleV (05/10/2015 11:31am):
That makes sense -- I was trying to do some weird gimmick with a low funds
start but it's obvious that didn't work out. Thanks for the clarification.
Xmo5 (05/10/2015 11:06pm):
How did this get here?
Last Edited on 05/10/2015 11:06pm


[Refresh map]



Advance Wars is (c) 1990-2001 Nintendo and (c) 2001 Intelligent Systems. All images are copyright their respective owners.